Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39207500›Full record

ArticleBundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz2024

[Strategies against loneliness-examples from an international comparative perspective].

Claus Wendt

Abstract readComparative StudyEnglish Abstract
In one paragraph

Article in Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Claus WendtLehrstuhl für Soziologie der Gesundheit und des Gesundheitssystems, Universität Siegen, Adolf-Reichwein-Str. 2, 57068, Siegen, Deutschland. wendt@soziologie.uni-siegen.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The extent of loneliness differs internationally. Especially in the developed welfare states of Northern Europe, loneliness levels in the population are comparatively low. However, the increase in loneliness in many countries shows that existing concepts are not sufficient to provide effective protection against loneliness. Younger people also need to be strengthened so that they do not withdraw when they experience social exclusion and loneliness. This requires qualified specialists in kindergartens, schools, sports clubs, and other leisure facilities who help children and young people to establish social contacts. Friendship and neighborhood models have proven to be successful when it comes to strategies to combat loneliness. Greater identification with the neighborhood and a feeling of security help build social networks and reduce loneliness. For older people it is important to be able to stay in their usual social environment and maintain their social contacts. To this end, accessible public spaces must be combined with home care and support services that are tailored to the needs and wishes of older people.

Indexed as

LonelinessCross-Cultural ComparisonEuropeGermanyHumansInternationalitySocial IsolationSocial SupportHealthInternational comparisonLonelinessNeighborhoodWelfare state

Identifiers

PMID39207500
PMCPMC11424651

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.